Not wanting to be picky, but I did note one comment in need of
correction...

On Sat, 15 Mar 1997 23:39:22 +0000 Rolf Furuli <furuli@online.no> writes:
[snip]
>SOURCES
>
>Ronald refers to the book `Aspect` by Bernard Comrie
>(1976). The same author has also written the book `Tense`
>(1985). Both are quite easy to understand. However, Comrie
>does not differentiate between aspect and Aktionsart,
>perhaps because he does not know real aspectual languages.

Actually, Comrie DOES note that there is a distinction between aspect and
Aktionsart in his *Aspect* text (cf. pp. 6-7, n. 4). He, and McKay
follows this kind of wording, describes Aktionsart as the
"lexicalisation" of aspect (although we might want to also include
grammatical and contextual influences as well).

Just thought I would point this out, since Comrie is an excellent
introductory text for those wishing to come to grips with verbal aspect
from a general linguistics point of view.